The Fairness Doctrine Lives (for NCAA Sports Events)

ML/NJ

[ml/nj]

Has anyone taken a look at the NCAA Women's Basketball Tournement Telecasts? I'm not really interested in the games themselves but I am interested in the politics.

Yesterday I was watching the UVa lacrosse game on ESPN2 and switched over to ESPN during a commercial. There was one of of the women's basketball games on. It looked to me like there were about 450 people in the stands, including mothers and bestfriends. The game that's on now (ODU-UCONN) has a little bit bigger "crowd"; maybe 1000.

Obviously there is little interest in these games but ESPN is producing them and carrying them as if there were great national interest. They have the usual broadcast crews and the same advertisers as they have for the men's games.

I'm not sure what the deal is here, but I suspect that the Title Nine Laws must require them to show as much women's game time as they do men's gametime if men and women each play a particular sport. Unless these games were played near one of the schools involved they obviously couldn't fill half of a small high school gymnasium. But the government thinks we must all pay attention.

ML/NJ

[Pikachu_Dad]

Curious.

Men lose custody in 95+% of all divorce cases. Where is our Title 9?

[beezdotcom]

I understand the basis for your argument, but as to whether it in any way affects ESPN’s motivation to air these games - well, I can rebut that argument with two words: spelling bee.

[ml/nj]

I can rebut that argument with two words: spelling bee.

Huh? Please explain.

ML/NJ

[Cicero]

When my daughter was here for Christmas with her two-year old son, she mentioned that they sometimes take him to see varsity games at the school where she teaches.

She said he absolutely loves the men’s hockey, and watches every move with fascination, but when it comes to women’s basketball, he gets bored and wants to leave after about ten minutes.

[joebuck]

Perhaps the NCAA requires broadcasting the womans tournament as a condition of getting the rights to broadcast the mens. Despite the fact that it’s a money loser. It could be similar to NBA rules requiring all its teams to sponser a WNBA team despite the fact they are big money losers and appeal to no one other than the dyke crowd.

[xjcsa]

I can understand questioning whether it’s worth it for ESPN to broadcast the games, but once they’re in, they’re in all the way. Should they put together a crappier broadcast?

As for the men, they’re not stuck on ESPN, they’re on CBS. That’s a real difference, if less of one than it used to be.

ESPN also broadcast the NCAA Division II Men’s championship game with their full production. I don’t think they ever do a game halfway.

[rabidralph]

So don’t watch it. Another thing to consider is, some people show up just to see their team play and then leave after it’s done, even though they have tickets to the whole day’s-worth of games. The women’s Final Four is sold out each year as is the men’s.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Basically sports will escape serious equal opportunity nonsense. Sporting exhibitions help keep the mob occupied.

[Krankor]

I think it might be the ugliness factor. If you watch women’s college sports like volleyball, softball or lacrosse, there always seems to be at least a few hot babes to ogle. For some reason, most basketball players seem to be a bit bulky and plain.

[muir_redwoods]

UCONN Women's baskeball regularly sells out the 10,000 seat Gampel pavilion. The popularity of the game is directly related to the quality of the team. I'm sure my friends from Tennessee have a similar story.

Despite the decidedly 2nd rate quality of their team ;-)

[ABN 505]

HMMmm.Not that nappy-headed Ho thing?

[MCCRon58]

Personally, I think if the womens sports would be played in hot pants and halters, then attendance would definitely improve. (of course what do I know, being just another male chauvinist pig???)

[LRoggy]

I think the best answer to this was the one about bundling the Mens and Women's rights by the NCAA. Clearly, far more men's games are televised then women's in the regular season, and almost no women's games are broadcast in the prime time slots in the regular season.

I also noticed some of the crowds, but in fairness, some of the men's first round games had sparse crowds too, given the popularity of this event it is surprising. The women's first round was played Monday-Tuesday, I believe, hardly the best nights to get people to the arenas.

On the other hand, since you watched the lacrosse game, please ESPN, put more games on the network broadcasts; Comcast doesn't carry ESPNU! I will watch just about any top college lacrosse game.

[purpleraine]

What else are they going to do? More talking heads everytime some player or coach farts?

They could run some HS championships and events from other countries warming up for the olympics, but then what do we know?

[justiceseeker93]

I don't think that the issue of televising women's basketball - which I agree carries little public interest in spite of the best social engineering attempts on the part of the MSM to promote it - is connected to Title 9. Title 9, IIRC, forces colleges to give out approximately equal numbers of athletic scholarships to women as compared to men, and to have equally good facilities. The schools meekly comply - despite the financial losses and losses of men's sports incurred - because to do otherwise jeopardizes funding from the federal government generally.

The reason why ESPN televises the women's games is probably that the NCAA dictates that policy to them for the sake of political correctness. The NCAA is in effect dictating to ESPN that they must also televise these financially draining women's events as a condition for the rights to the lucrative men's events. Since the men's college sports have been a staple of ESPN since its founding, ESPN has little choice but to swallow the NCAA's bitter pill. Of course, as part of the left-leaning MSM itself, ESPN is not inclined to put up too much of a fuss.

[hole_n_one]

Coincidentally, ESPN2 is currently airing a show about Title IX.

[Gondring]

ping

[SeaHawkFan]

Obviously there is little interest in these games but ESPN is producing them and carrying them as if there were great national interest. They have the usual broadcast crews and the same advertisers as they have for the men's games.

Aside from the Mens March Madness, there is nothing going on in the sports world. The NCAA womens tornament does draw a decent viewership from H.S. girls and college players. ESPN would not be broadcasting it if there wasn't a profit to be made. Besides, with so many channels, ESPN needs programing to fill out the schedule.

[SoCal Pubbie]

If what you postulate in your post is the only explanation, that the won loss record determines attendance, then there should be about even numbers in overall average attendance between men's and women's basketball. But the numbers show a different story. For 2007 men's games averaged 5,548 per game, while the women averaged only 1,586 per contest. One might speculate how raising women's ticket prices to the same cost as men might further divide those numbers. For example, UCONN women's tickets are about ten bucks cheaper than men's.

Now, one might argue that fewer schools dominate the women's game than men's, so fewer teams are competitive. That really only works in the tourney though, as each conference produces a champion. In any event when the increasing youth participation of girl's sports raises the level of play across the board, eventually that argument will have to be abandoned too.